12?Atlfe$COmbe. VccdcaXum unknown
' i
J L
> t i
-t r-
|T(u5 iyind/3U),in ifaap&Ce.,
\isuu onmctxc remaining.
JTftc jws'mon o/otHcr oiwnlttgs.
Hxr6fe73C>7?x».
PLATE I. PLANS 6 and 6. pp. 15, 16.
( 15 )
PLANS OF, AND BRIEF ARCHITECTURAL NOTES ON, KENT
CHURCHES.
PART II. MAPLESCOMBE, ST. NICHOLAS HARBLEDOWN (NORMAN
HOSPITAL CHURCH), ST. BARTHOLOMEW CHATHAM, ST. BOTOLPH
RUXLEY, ST. NICHOLAS PLUMSTEAD.
BY F. 0. ELLISTON-ERWOOD, F.S.A.
THE RUINED CHURCH OF MAPLESOOMBE (Plan 5).
THE dedication of this now ruined church, hidden away in a dry
vaUey on the northern slope of the North Downs, is unknown. It is a
great pity that these ruins were not less known, for they have
suffered considerable damage in recent years from the discovery of the
place by speculative builders, by the depredations of the worst sort of
visitor and by the vulgar practices of a section of the cheaper press
in its so caUed " treasure hunts " which brought hordes of irresponsibles
into the district, to its hreparable damage. This is aU the more to
be regretted because the building under consideration (Plan No. 5)
though smaU and fragmentary, is of major interest. It is an example,
rare in Kent, of the single ceUed apsidal church, having no structural
division (chancel arch) between nave and altar, and thus no distinct
chancel.1
Further there is no ashlar in its construction, the material being
entirely local flint, though here and there were once to be seen pieces
of Roman brick. The only remaining window, high up in the gable
and thus weU above the sub-human destructive level, shows how
understanding the builders were in the use of this intractable material,
and the N.W. coin is a notable example of the skilful use of the more
tabular forms of this stone. SimUar careful craftsmanship can be seen
wherever any original waU surface remains, notably in the curve of the
apse. There were no datable architectural detaUs remaining even when
I first saw the church in 1906, and gaps in the waU were, as I have
indicated in my plan, the only clue to the position of openings. There
was a little contemporary plastering within and without, but the floor
level was completely destroyed. The interior dimensions were 54 feet
long and 22 feet 3 inches wide and its date is probably late 11th century.
For comparison I give a plan of
THE HOSPITAL CHURCH OF ST. NICHOLAS, HARBLEDOWN (Plan 6)
I hope later on to give a fuU account of this most interesting
building, but meanwhile I have extracted from the more detailed
1 Pairweather. Aisleless Apsidal Churches, 1933, p. 10.
16 NOTES ON KENT CHURCHES
plan, the Norman portion which shows a structure of exactly the same
type as Maplescombe, but slightly smaUer. The original west door
is preserved, but only the starting of the curve of the apse north and
south. There is however sufficient to be certain of its original
dimensions. The date o f this church is probably late 11th or very early
12th century.
THE HOSPITAL CHUROH OF ST. BARTHOLOMEW, CHATHAM (Plan 7)
WhUe on the subject of Hospital Chapels, the plan of this church
which I exhibited to the Society when it visited the buUding in 1947
may be of interest. The whole of the fabric has been drasticaUy
restored but in spite of that, many notable features survive. The
plan caUs for some comment: it is an apsidal church belonging
to the " three ceUed " type,1 the church at Eynesford dealt with in the
first part of this paper being another of the same class. At Chatham,
however, there is an unusual feature in the addition, which appears
to be contemporary, of a sort of transeptal structure of somewhat
massive buUd, evidently intended for two altars. The north aisle
and its arcade are modern. The windows on the south side of the
nave have flat lintels of oaken boards and this would seem to imply
the existence of the subsidiary buUdings of the hospital on this side,
which the presence of old waUs beneath the dense mass of ivy
seems to confirm. The point is that these three windows would be
above the roof line of any pentise hke buUding on this side, and
to obviate the necessity for extra height to take the arched window
heads, flat wooden lintels were substituted. There is a peculiar
recess at the east end of this south waU Which may have been
devised to house a further altar, but on the other hand it may have
been a means of communication with any buildings on this side. An
unusual sedUe in the south respond of the arch of triumph is not entirely
convincing but may be of 13th cent. date. In the corner of the
modern vestry is a 12th cent, pillar piscina found during the restorations.
The plan of the church has considerable bearing on the matter
of date. Popular opinion ascribes the foundation to Gundulf (as
is so much other work in Rochester) but it may be doubted whether
such a plan was possible in his time and a documentary reference
to Hugh of Trottescliffe " monachus noster " (afterwards, 1124, Abbot
of St. Augustine's, Canterbury) as the founder and builder, puts the
date in the first quarter of the 12th cent, a much more likely one than
the period 1076-1108, the dates of Gundulf's episcopacy.'
Though the hospital is actually in Chatham, aU its associations lie
with Rochester, being erected, as were so many simUar foundations,
just without the gates of the city, in this case the East Gate.
1 Fairweather, op. cit.", p. 15.
^ HT^AA AM
Sc&Qof fectC
• • •
w
^21
O I
O
W
H
S
» Q
€l937
rnmsmMmmmmmm Tfve HosnitaT of
PLATE n . PLAN 7. p. 16.
18 NOTES ON KENT CHURCHES
THE RUINED CHURCH OF ST. BOTOLPH, RUXLEY (Plan 8)
Though Ruxley gave its name to a Kentish Hundred and though
the important famUy of Rokesle was closely associated with it, this
ruined church is late in date and insignificant in size. There was an
earher church, but it seems to have disappeared and left no trace. It
may have stood (it probably did) near to the present buUding and the
Manor House, but no trace of Norman material has been recorded and
the architectural history of the place does not commence tiU near
& BtffolfiH, KuxWtJ. KenX. (xiii - xiv cailo
cle&*U«a
VbcW hiockeA
fcmcLrf
HocJui umxdcw eatcvt
Uockttl deer
.
nj? ik* untuLnit mullunu ore wmWcfumt
eUtttvued cmdn'ifcx
jz-z-rxpt
d*A*vyzd
• i w i . i . i Scale IO do' Inmn-EcC
^HtVeaLoffure^ntCfuxictvOgoj).
PLAN 10.
the church remained tiU 1945 when one of Hitler's rockets wrecked
the whole structure. Only the Tower, the perpendicular arcade
and the Norman window survive. The future form of the church
is not yet decided, nor is it possible to say whether the 13th cent,
transept can be restored. .
The church possesses three bells cast m 1686 by Christopher
Hodson of St. Mary Cray, a fourth cast in 1790 in Whitechapel. The
vicar says that the rocket which destroyed the church smashed
the beU frames. He believes the bells are intact, except that one
was cracked years ago.
